Based on news articles: The Daily Beast. “Local Businesses Love the ‘Domestic Terror’ Zone in Seattle, Actually” World Net Daily. “Seattle Zone’s New Enforcers Blocking Police Response to ‘Rape and Robberies’” After reading these two news articles (uploaded in Bb), compare and contrast the arguments that each paper makes, paying particular attention to the elements of argumentation that are included in the PPTs in Tab 11 on Bb (Argument 1 PPT: Cause & Effect; Argument Basics PPT; Argument 3: Structure & Evidence). Which elements of argumentation stand out to you the most? Is there anything in particular that you feel the author of each article did really well or really poorly? Explain your claim using evidence from the texts. Some things to consider about the articles while you are formulating your opinion of both the articles and which one does a better job of creating a fair argument: Does the author establish trust with the reader by offering a fair argument, even considering the opposing view? What type of evidence is provided, if any? Is it credible? Is it relatable to the argument or taken out of context? Does the author use Aristotelian Appeals? Which ones? How well does the author use them? There are many more items you need to consider; these are just some thoughts. You must write a minimum 300-word compare and contrast argument of which author you feel did a better job in constructing an argument. Remember that you are analyzing their arguments. You are not arguing your thoughts on the topics they wrote about.